You assume that security being called on me would have allowed me to board my flight as I had planned.

That being said, I am not saying both situations are the same, my point was and is that I expect that this story is not unique and that only a portion of them do we ever hear about.

Someone probably relayed the 'threat' of the tweet to someone on the flight crew who raised the 'is this a passenger a threat?' flag.

Remember that for a threat to be effective it need only be believed by the target... even if there is no actual plan to make good on it.

In a world where after going through a laughable but invasive search by TSA screeners and about to board an aircraft where you are legally required to obey all instructions of the flight crew in order to return to your home many miles away... is it any wonder that even the threat of the police being called might make someone comply?

Why do you assume her consent would be required?

The airport is a public place and there is little right to privacy or anonymity when in public... doubly so when you are wearing a name tag.

Did the agent think the whole thing would be erased from everyone's memory and it would be as if nobody complained?

To play devils advocate... maybe.

While from time to time we hear stories like this of some employee who acts in a rather bad way PR wise... how often do you think similar events happen and that we never hear about them? Probably a lot more.

The morning after a canceled connection flight I had a gate agent threaten to call security on me for using the word 'safety' with regards to my knees being impacted against the seat in front of me on the upcoming flight.

Granted... it was an excuse for her as she didn't like my attitude (I didn't like having to employ it), I didn't call the media or tweet about the incident, I just pledged to avoid that airline in future... and later upgraded it to a blanket ban after the next time I used the airline (4 years later) a similar event happened where my connecting flight was cancelled and trapping me in the same airport.

Using publically visible information (nametag & gate sign) to state an opinion constitutes harassment?

God help the reviewers on Yelp or Angie'sList who give their opinions on different businesses.

Unifying the UI is less important and desirable than unifying the underlying OS.

Which has already been done IIRC.

While Windows Phone 7 had the underpinnings of Windows CE... Windows Phone 8 had an NT kernel under the hood... ditto for the Xbox One.

Oh shut your mouth stupid Americans, ask Kiev to release the confiscated ATC record and explain why MH17 deviated over 500km from its usual flight path? And why was is requested to drop from 35000ft to 33000ft before it got hit?

Vladimir, is that you? Would you care to offer any sort of citation for the claims you have made?

Still, legally a separate distinction from a "Declaration of War" or other incidents of just "Going to War".

Semantics, I know,

Explain please then how what you call a 'semantics' difference is also 'legally a separate distinction'.

We aren't talking the difference between murder & manslaughter (both legally defined in law as well as their conditions that must be).

Care to point out which section of the US Constitution or other bit of international law which legally shows the difference?

It's always fun when someone forgets about the difference between the 'rule of law' vs 'rule of man'.

We live in a rule of law society, the kid you are likening things likely lives in a mixed mode household... where the parents can ground the child at any time and for any reason... but can't kill him for talking back.

Microsoft does a lot of its programming in India.

How much is 'a lot'? What %?

We all know that Indian programming is of poor quality, and the reason is not because Indian programmers are much less competent. It has more to do with the fact that in programming if two parties can't communicate completely unambiguously in one language then they have no hope of writing good software.

So that's a problem only with Indians? Not Chinese? Australians? Romanians? Turks? Russians? Nigerians?

If you hire those who can communicate well, where they came from is unimportant.

If they have a reasonable belief that the person will used the purchased item in a crime... then yes... sometimes.

This is nothing new... plenty of gun manufacturers and stores have been hit by lawsuits over the years (and in some cases, criminal charges) because items they manufactured or sold were later used in a crime.

Bar tenders have seen civil & criminal prosecutions for continuing to serve someone who was already clearly intoxicated and then later drove home and killed someone.

I'm not saying it's right... I'm simply stating what is.

It's illegal in quite a few states to wear a mask in public due to past attempts on cracking down on the KKK.

Welcome to the fun world of anticipatory obstruction of justice.

Yes... you can be charged & convicted of obstruction by way of destroying evidence that is not yet being sought but that you think might be.

If you are already under arrest or otherwise detained when they decide to illegally search your phone... I don't think the castle doctrine or even very wide interpretation of stand your ground will help you... doubly so as they would have already checked you for dangerous objects on your person.